HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/20/1999, 3 - APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION'S ACTION APPROVING USE PERMIT A 32-99 TO ALLOW POSSIBLE REPLACEMENT USES FOR AN EXISTING NON-CONFORMING USE (KSBY AT 467 HILL STREET). council 7-201t99
j acEnaa 12Epo12t It..Numb.
3
CITYOF SAN LUIS O B I S P O
FROM: Arnold Jonas, Community Development Director P rai
Prepared By: Pam Ricci, Associate Planner f1K
SUBJECT: Appeal of Planning Commission's action approving Use Permit A 32-99 to allow
possible replacement uses for an existing non-conforming use (KSBY at 467 Hill Street).
CAO RECOMMENDATION
Adopt Draft Resolution A, denying the appeal, and upholding the Planning Commission's action
to approve the use permit to establish a list of possible replacement uses for an existing non-
conforming broadcast studio (KSBY television station) located on the west side of Hill Street,
between Lincoln and Mountain View,based on findings, and with conditions.
DISCUSSION
Situation
KSBY is in the process of moving to its newly remodeled building on Calle Joaquin on the south
side of the City near Highway 101. A part of their operation is still located on Hill Street
between Mountain View and Lincoln Streets where they have been located for 46 years. The
Hill Street site is in a R-1 zone. Broadcast studios are not an allowed use in the R-1 zone.
Therefore,KSBY at the Hill Street location is considered a legal non-conforming use.
The City's zoning regulations contain rules about the continuation of non-conforming uses. One
provision allows for one non-conforming use to be replaced with another if the new use is
established within 6 months of the old use vacating the site and an administrative use permit is
approved. A finding must be made to approve the use permit that the new use will have "similar
or less severe impacts on its surroundings in terms of noise, traffic, parking demand, hours of
operation, and visual incompatibility. "
Project Description
KSBY has applied for the required use permit by submitting a list of potential uses that may
replace it. In its report to the Planning Commission, staff took the applicant's list and eliminated
some of the uses that seemed most inappropriate and classified the others as possible uses with
the approval of either an administrative or a Planning Commission use permit No uses were
recommended to be allowed without a use permit which would involve a public hearing and
notice.
3-1
Council Agenda Repori 5BY Appeal (A 32-99)
Page 2
Planning Commission's Action
On a 4-2-1 vote (Commr. Peterson & Chair. Ready voting no; Commr. Senn absent), the
Commission approved the use permit, based on findings, and with conditions. The Commission
substantially reduced the list of potential uses beyond that recommended by staff, and required
that all potential uses be processed through a Planning Commission use permit. In addition to
changes in the list of uses, the Commission amended staff's recommendation to modify: allowed
hours of operation to be from 7:00 a.m. - 7:00 p.m. and require roof-mounted equipment to be
removed or screened. They also added two additional conditions which limited the floor space
occupied in the building to the supply of on-site parking and prohibited further building
additions.
Citizen Participation
Several neighbors spoke at the Planning Commission hearing against allowing the continuation
of commercial uses at the site. A number of letters had also been submitted by residents
expressing concerns with the use permit, based on their experiences with having KSBY as a
neighbor, including traffic, parking, hours of operation, glare from lights, safety and roof-
mounted equipment and antennas. A petition against the use permit signed by 34 neighbors was
received at the hearing.
Appeal Filed
On May 4, 1999, Wade O' Hagan, Business manager for KSBY, 1772 Calle Joaquin, filed an
appeal of the Planning Commission's action. The submitted appeal form cites that the action
was inconsistent with the City's Municipal Code. A supplemental letter was later submitted
dated May 17, 1999 which elaborates on their reasons for filing the appeal.
The letter indicates that since the building has been used as a fully-staffed broadcast studio
operating for 24 hours a day since the 1950s that any of the applicant/appellant's proposed uses
would have resulted in "similar or less severe impacts on its surroundings. " The letter further
criticizes the Commission's action in denying many of the uses proposed by the applicant given
the context of the required finding. The letter concludes by noting that the remaining uses have
limited feasibility given the "stringent and unreasonable conditions imposed by the Planning
Commission. "
Response to Appeal Issues
Despite the appellant's claims that the Commission's action was overly restrictive,the findings and
conditions as approved are consistent with Chapter 17.10 of the City's Zoning Regulations which
regulates non-conforming uses. In the Commission's judgment, uses that were ultimately
eliminated from the appellant's list had the potential to result in more severe impacts on the
surrounding neighborhood than the KSBY studio use does. In approving a list of potential uses,
rather than a known specific tenant, there is an implicit risk that the action may be more
3-2
Council Agenda Report---i-MY Appeal (A 32-99)
Page 3
conservative to attempt to appropriately address neighborhood compatibility concerns. The
appellant may feel that almost any commercial use would have less severe impacts than the
television studio did, given its hours of operation and large number of employees. However,the
Commission's main task was to look objectively at what uses, under what conditions, may be
appropriate for the unusual circumstance of a commercial building completely surrounded by
single-family residences.
The Planning Commission's action which established conditions that: slightly modify the
recommended hours of operation; mandate the screening or removal of roof-mounted equipment;
and prohibit further building additions, will likely have little impact on the success of future
businesses at the site. The added Condition No. 10, which limits new uses to the floor area within
the building that on-site parking can accommodate,as well as the elimination of many of the uses
that staff felt originally could potentially be established at the site with the restrictions of use permit
conditions,could well have more significant impacts on potential future uses.
Parking
In terns of parking,the site only has 13 spaces on site, or one space for each 692 square feet of
floor space, according to the statement prepared by the applicant. As indicated in the applicant's
submitted materials, KSBY had over 80 employees. Obviously, this situation created a huge
parking shortfall and resulted in resentment and frustration for the neighbors with the use.
Given this parking disparity, the Planning Commission established, with the approval of the use
permit, that new uses could only occupy as much space within the building that available on-site
parking would accommodate. Assuming that 13 on-site parking spaces exist, new uses with a
parking requirement of one space for each 300 square feet of floor area, could only occupy 3,900
square feet, or about 43%, of the building's floor area.
In the Planning Commission staff report, staff acknowledged that the only way that a
replacement use could be established at the site is if additional parking was provided on-site to
better comply with the parking demands that the requested uses would generate. However, staff
believed that the best approach to evaluating parking would be at the time that the use permit for
a specific use was requested. The basis for this strategy was to have more knowledge of the
proposed use and site parking solutions before establishing a set requirement for either the
number of parking spaces required or floor area restrictions.
List of Potential Uses
The applicant originally proposed a list of 35 possible replacement uses. Staff, in its report to the
Commission,reduced the list down to 17, eliminating those uses which appeared to raise the most
significant compatibility concerns. The applicant,as part of their presentation at the hearing, did
not indicate a concern with the reduced list of proposed uses recommended by staff.
3-3
Council Agenda Report BY Appeal (A 32-99)
Page 4
The Planning Commission ultimately approved a list with 10 different potential uses. Much of the
basis of the applicant's appeal is the perceived restrictiveness of the approved list of uses. In staff's
opinion,there are some uses that were eliminated from the list of potential uses that may be suitable
at the site with appropriate restrictions,such as professional offices. It is important to remember
that each use would require the processing of a use permit application. The use permit process
would allow for submittal of a more detailed project description and the specific evaluation of
potential neighborhood compatibility issues.
FISCAL IMPACT
None.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Adopt Draft Resolution B which upholds the appellant's appeal, by modifying the Planning
Commission's action (list of uses originally recommended by staff in its report to the
Planning Commission, with all uses requiring a Planning Commission use permit). Other
conditions are the same as approved by the Planning Commission, with the exception of
eliminating Condition No. 10 which mandated that floor area match available on-site
parking.
2. Continue with direction to the staff and appellant.
Attachments:
Attachment 1: Draft Resolution A(deny appeal-Planning Commission's action)
Attachment 2: Draft Resolution B (uphold appeal-approve use permit with modified conditions)
Attachment 3: Appeal to City Council received 54-99
Attachment 4: Planning Commission follow-up letter&Resolution No. 5254-99
Attachment 5: Draft 4-28-99 Planning Commission minutes
Attachment 6: 4-28-99 Planning Commission staff report
Attachment 7: Letter/petition received at the Planning Commission hearing
Attachment 8: Letter from applicant/appellant requesting extension
to July 20, 1999
usc\A 32-99(KSBY Council report)
3-4
Resolution "A"
RESOLUTION NO. (1999 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
DENYING AN APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S
ACTION,THEREBY APPROVING THE USE PERMIT
AS CONDITIONED BY THE COMMISSION FOR PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 467 HILL STREET (A 32-99)
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on April 28, 1999,
and approved the request to establish a list of potential replacement uses for the non-conforming
KSBY broadcast studio use at 467 Hill Street; and
WHEREAS, Wade O' Hagan, Business manager for KSBY, 1772 Calle Joaquin, filed an
appeal of the Planning Commission's action on May 4, 1999; and
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing on June 15, 1999, and has
considered testimony of the appellant, interested parties,the records of the Planning Commission
hearings and action, and the evaluation and recommendation of staff, and
WHEREAS,the City Council has determined that the project is categorically exempt under
Section 15301, Class 1 of the California Environmental Quality Act, because it is the use of an
existing facility with no significant expansion of that use.
BE IT RESOLVED, by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings. That this Council, after consideration of the proposed project
(A 32-99), the appellants' statement, staff recommendations and reports thereof, makes the
following findings:
1. The proposed list of uses will not adversely affect the health,safety or welfare of persons living
or working at the site or in the vicinity, with the approval of required use permits and
conformance with conditions and established performance standards.
3-5
Resolution No. (1999 Series)
Page 2
2. The proposed list of uses could be appropriate at the proposed location and compatible with
surrounding land uses if kept to be small-scale with limited hours of operation.
3. The proposed list of uses conforms with the general plan and meets zoning ordinance
requirements,with conformance to this use permit and future required use permit conditions.
4. The proposed list of uses is exempt from environmental review.
5. The proposed list of uses will have similar or less severe impacts on its surroundings,in terms
of noise, traffic, parking demand, hours of operation and visual incompatibility, than the
previous use of a broadcast studio(television station).
SECTION 2. Appeal Denied. The appeal of the Planning Commission's action is hereby
denied. Therefore, the Commission's action to approve the use permit is upheld, subject to the
following conditions:
1. The following is the approved list of potentially allowed uses at the site with the approval of
Planning Commission use permit:
• Advertising & related services
• Convents& monasteries
• Computer services
• Credit reporting & collection
• Executive suites - several small miscellaneous businesses which share a common
reception area, conference room, etc.
• Insurance services(local)
• Offices(contractors)- all types of general and special building contractor's offices
• Organizations
• Photographic studios
• Research & development - services, software, consumer products, instruments, office
equipment and similar items with no related chemical processing
2. Any new uses established at the site shall have operating hours between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00
p.m.
3. An application shall be made for architectural review of plans to make any changes to the site
and building. A site, grading and landscaping plan shall be submitted which shows how
additional parking could be provided. New lighting fixtures that are down-type lights which
do not create light trespass onto other properties shall be installed.
3-6
Resolution No. (1999 Series)
Page 3
4. All notices of use permit hearings for proposed uses shall be for a 1,000-foot radius from the
site.
5. With review of use permits, applicants shall submit information on total number of
employees, hours of operation, delivery needs, and anticipated customer traffic.
6. Existing roof-mounted equipment and antennae shall be removed or screened from views.
7. The site shall be maintained in a neat and orderly manner. All plant materials shall be
maintained and replaced as needed.
8. The approval of a use permit for the establishment of a new commercial use at the site needs
to occur within the requisite 6-month period of the site being vacated by KSBY. With review
of the use permit, specific conditions shall be established for the timing of tenant and parking
lot improvements. If a new commercial use is not legally established within 6 months from
the time that KSBY completely vacates the site, then the site's non-conforming status is lost,
and the site could only be developed with conforming uses for the R-1 zone.
9. Any new use established at the site through an approved use permit shall be reviewed if any
reasonable written citizen or Police or Fire Department complaints are received by the city.
In review of the use permit, the Planning Commission may add, delete or modify conditions
of approval, or revoke the use permit.
10.The floor area occupied by new uses established in the building shall be limited to the
amount of available on-site parking provided, consistent with required parking ratios
provided in the current City zoning regulations.
11. There shall be no additional building floor area added on the site.
On motion of , seconded by
and on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this_day of , 1999.
. 3-7
Resolution No. (1999 Series)
Page 4
Mayor Allen Settle
ATTEST-
Lee.Price, City Clerk.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
i tto- ey ey . Jorgensen
Res\A 32-99(KSBY deny.appcal)
3-8
Resolution "B"
RESOLUTION NO. (1999 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
UPHOLDING AN APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S
ACTION, THEREBY APPROVING THE USE PERMIT
WITH MODIFIED CONDITIONS FOR PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 467 HILL STREET (A 32-99)
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on April 28, 1999,
and approved the request to establish a list of potential replacement uses for the non-conforming
KSBY broadcast studio use at 467 Hill Street; and
WHEREAS, Wade O' Hagan, Business manager for KSBY, 1772 Calle Joaquin, filed an
appeal of the Planning Commission's action on May 4, 1999; and
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing on June 15, 1999, and has
considered testimony of the appellant, interested parties, the records of the Planning Commission
hearings and action, and the evaluation and recommendation of staff; and
WHEREAS,the City Council has determined that the project is categorically exempt under
Section 15301, Class 1 of the California Environmental Quality Act, because it is the use of an
existing facility with no significant expansion of that use.
BE IT RESOLVED,by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings. That this Council, after consideration of the proposed project
(A 32-99), the appellants' statement, staff recommendations and reports thereof, makes the
following findings:
1. The proposed list of uses will not adversely affect the health,safety or welfare of persons living
or working at the site or in the vicinity, with the approval of required use permits and
conformance with conditions and established performance standards.
3-9
Resolution No. (1999 Series)
Page 2
2. The proposed list of uses could be appropriate at the proposed location and compatible with
surrounding land uses if kept to be small-scale with limited hours of operation.
3. The proposed list of uses conforms with the general plan and meets zoning ordinance
requirements,with conformance to this use permit and future required use permit conditions.
4. The proposed list of uses is exempt from environmental review.
5. The proposed list of uses will have similar or less severe impacts on its surroundings,in terms
of noise, traffic, parking demand, hours of operation and visual incompatibility, than the
previous use of a broadcast studio(television station).
SECTION 2. Appeal Upheld. The appeal of the Planning Commission's action is hereby
upheld. Therefore, the Commission's action to approve the use permit is modified, subject to
the following conditions:
1. The following is the approved list of potentially allowed uses at the site with the approval of
Planning Commission use permit:
• Advertising& related services
• Broadcast studios
• Convents & monasteries
• Computer services
• Credit reporting & collection
• Detective& security services
• Employment agencies
• Executive suites - several small miscellaneous businesses which share a common
reception area,conference room, etc.
• Insurance services (local)
• Offices (contractors)- all types of general and special building contractor's offices
• Offices (professional) attorneys, copnselors, accountants, investment brokers, realtors,
appraisers
• Organizations
• Photographic studios
• Research & development - services, software, consumer products, instruments, office
equipment and similar items with no related chemical processing
• Schools - nursery, and business, trade, recreational and other specialized schools with
limited enrollment
• Ticket/travel agencies
• Title companies
3-10
Resolution No. (1999 Series)
Page 3
2. Any new uses established at the site shall have operating hours between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00
p.m.
3. An application shall be made for architectural review of plans to make any changes to the site
and building. A site, grading and landscaping plan shall be submitted which shows how
additional parking could be provided. New lighting fixtures that are down-type lights which
do not create light trespass onto other properties shall be installed.
4. All notices of use permit hearings for proposed usesshall be for a 1,000-foot radius from the
site.
5. With review of use permits, applicants shall submit information on total number of
employees, hours of operation, delivery needs, and anticipated customer traffic.
6. Existing roof-mounted equipment and antennae shall be removed or screened from views.
7. The site shall be maintained in a neat and orderly manner. All plant materials shall be
maintained and replaced as needed.
8. The approval of a use permit for the establishment of a new commercial use at the site needs
to occur within the requisite 6-month period of the site being vacated by KSBY. With review
of the use permit, specific conditions shall be established for the timing of tenant and parking
lot improvements. If a new commercial use is not legally established within 6 months from
the time that KSBY completely vacates the site, then the site's non-conforming status is lost,
and the site could only be developed with conforming uses for the R-1 zone.
9. Any new use established at the site through an approved use permit shall be reviewed if any
reasonable written citizen or Police or Fire Department complaints are received by the city.
In review of the use permit, the Planning Commission may add, delete or modify conditions
of approval,or revoke the use permit.
10. There shall be no additional building floor area added on the site.
On motion of , seconded by
and on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
3-11
Resolution No. (1999 Series)
Page 4
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this_day of . 1999.
Mayor Allen Settle
ATTEST:
Lee Price, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ty orn Je ey Viorgensen
ResW 32-99(KSBY-uphold appeal)
3-12
cachment 3
SM WIS
ONSPO t oC1 �
Egg. APPEAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL
In accordance with the appeals procedures as authorized by Title, 1, Chapter 1.20 of the
San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, the undersigned hereby appeals from the decision of
Vin, ,N; if 7 rendered on
which consisted of the following (i.e., explain what you are appealing and the grounds
for submitting the appeal. Use additional sheets as needed.)
5..�,c uf4aclnecl ` �-�{ex-
4iCr, 7 y, // Sf . 54"C,�7 1 i,i s 0G,_s?c
The undersigned discussed the decision being appealed with:
�6�rn A?4 - C114f1pe r;rY Uw. on L2eLg5
Name/Department (Date)
Appellant: 6LLdde / 71z &lk 1,4 a 0 alk S,e-v, elf
Name/Title Mailing Address (& Zi " Code) q:57yos
SHy-414)0 Z r? 371S/.
Home Phone Work Phone
Representative: WZ& QW&9 x,17 -fisA -
Name/Title Mailing Address (& Zip Code)
For Official Use Only:
Calendared for June 15 , 1999 Date & Time Received:
c: City Attorney 3 0 P M
City Administrative Officer RECEIVED
Copy to the followin<
Attachment 3 MAY 0 s,ss
U-7-7� SL CITY CLER
n -13
Original in City Clerk's Office
WARREN A.SINSHEIMER III o1NSHEIMER, SCHIEBELHUT&BAG6 L;17
ROBERT K.SCTBEBELHUT A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION PASO ROBLES OFFICE:
K.ROBIN BAGG'M ATTORNEYS ATLAW 1200 Vine Street
MARTEN J.TANGEMAN Paso Robles,California 93446
THOMAS M.DUGGAN Post Office Box 31 (805)238-2300
MARTEN P.MOROSKJ 1010 Peach Street
DAVID A.JUHNKE Fax(805)238-2322
STEVEN I.ADAMSKI SAN LUIS OBISPO,CALIFORNIA 93406-0031
THOMAS D.GREEN 541-2800
M.SUZANNE FRYER (805)
THOMAS 1.MADDEN III Fax(805)541.2802 DIRECT ALL MAIL TO:
STEVEN M.CHANLEY
MARIA L.HUTKIN P.O.Box 31
RYAN S.BEZERRA San Luis Obispo,California 93406
LINDA SOMERS SMITH
JOHN E.D.NICHOISON
NOTICE OF APPEAL
(Municipal Code, Chapter 17.66)
To the Clerk of the City of San Luis Obispo:
In the matter of A 32-99 (467 Hill Street), SJL of California LP (dba KSBY TV)
hereby appeals the decision of the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo rendered
on April 28, 1999. This appeal is based on the grounds that, among other things, the decision is
inconsistent with law including, without limitation, the City's Municipal Code.
Dated: May 4, 1999 ;Richard
L of California LP
Armfield
esident, General Manager
Wade O'Hagan
Business Manager
Thoma n
Attorney
RECEIVED
MAY 0 1999
SLO CST K
WARREN A.SIUEEaIEeIII SINSHEIMER,SCHIEBELHUT&BACTUE 'T
ROBERT G SA PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION PASO ROBLFS OFFICE:
�RfI'
G ROBIN DAGGETT ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1200 Vine Street
MARTIN J.TANGEMAN Paco Robles,Califomia 93446
MAS M.DUGGAN Post Office Box 31 (805)238-2300
ma P.MOROSKE 1010 Peach Street Fax(805)238-2322
ID A. ADA a
STEVEN J. SAN LUIS OBISPO,CALIFORNIA 93406-0031
I.ADAI�KI
THOMAS D.GREEN (805)541-2800
M SUZANNE FRYER
THOMAS I.MADDEN III Fax(805)541-2802 DIRECT ALL MAIL TO:
STEVEN M.CJIANLEY P.O.Box 31
MARIA L HIJTKI N
RYAN S.BEZFRRA San Luis Obispo.Califomia 93406
U NDA SOMERS SMITH
JOHN E.D.NICHOLSON
May 17, 1999 CLIENT:
City Clerk HAND-DELIVERED
City of San Luis Obispo
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, California 93401
Re: Supplement to Notice of Appeal
Dear Clerk:
This letter is written to supplement the appeal filed on May 4, 1999 on behalf of the
applicant,SJL of California,LP(dba KSBY Television). After being provided a written copy of the
Planning Commission's April 28 decision,we intend this letter to provide a more specific statement
of the grounds for the appeal filed from the Planning Commission decision.
The use of the property at the time of the appeal was as a fully-staffed television broadcast
station operating around the clock. This use had been operating at the 467 Hill Street location on
a continuous basis since at least the 1950's and was entitled to continue to operate on that basis as
a legal non-conforming use.
Section 17.11 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code provides that an existing non-
conforming use may be replaced with another non-conforming use upon a finding that"the new use
has similar or less severe impacts on its surroundings in terms of noise, traffic, parking demand,
hours of operation and visual incompatibility." The applicant proposed several replacement uses all
of which would have less severe impacts than the existing use. The Planning Commission ignored
the evidence and the express language of the City Municipal Code and refused to make the required
finding for a replacement non-conforming use. Instead, the Planning Commission simply denied
many of the uses proposed by the applicant. As to those uses which were not denied outright,some
are not economically feasible in themselves. Others may have some limited feasibility but cannot
operate under stringent and unreasonable conditions imposed by the Planning Commission.
KCDD DIR
Q FIN DIR
Q FIRE CHIEF
QPWDIRRECEIVED Q POUCE CHF .
Q REC DIR
I °a UTIL o� MAY 13.41!6
SLO CITY CLERK
City Clerk
May 17, 1999
Page 2
A copy of this letter is being provided to Arnold Jonas,Community Development Director.
We request a meeting with Mr. Jonas to discuss this appeal at his earliest convenience.
Very truly yours,
SINSHEIIAER, SCHIEBELHUT & BAGGETT
THOMAS D. GREEN
TDG:tlg
G:\GENMLkL\LTRUCSBY\12ksbyappeall-0517.wpd
cc: Arnold Jonas, Community Development Director
Jeffrey G. Jorgensen, City Attorney
3-16
Attachment 4
���oAh�Ilnll18111111111��� ��ui�iiii��►� Illll citySan
OBISPO
990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249
May 4, 1999
Richard Armfield
KSBY
467 Hill Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93405
SUBJECT: A 32-99
467 Hill Street
Dear Mr. Armfield:
The Planning Commission, at its meeting of April 28, 1999, approved your request to
allow replacement uses for an existing non-conforming broadcast studio, based on the
findings and subject to the conditions listed in the attached resolution.
The decision of the Planning Commission is final unless appealed to the City Council
within 10 days of the action. An appeal may be filed with the City Clerk by any person
aggrieved by a decision of the Commission.
Due to the City Water allocation regulations,the Planning Commission's approval expires
after three years if construction has not started, unless the Commission designated a
different time period. On request the Community Development Director may grant
renewals for successive periods of not more than one year each.
If your project involves building one or more additional non-residential space, it may be
subject to the requirement for a water allocation or a water usage offset. Contact this
department for details.
If you have any questions, please contact Pam Ricci at 781-7168.
Sincerely,
Ron Id Whise and
Development Review Manager
cc: County of SLO Assessor's Office Attachment 4
Attachment: Resolution#5254-99
—17
/rCO, The City of San Luis Obispo is committed to include the disabled in all of its services, programs and activities
vy Telecommunications Device for the Deaf(805) 781-7410.
SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 5254-99
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo did conduct
a public hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo,
California, on April 28, 1999, pursuant to a proceeding instituted under application A
32-99, SJL of California LP (dba KSBY TV), applicant.
ITEM REVIEWED:
Request to allow replacement uses for existing non-conforming broadcast studio.
DESCRIPTION:
On file in the office of Community Development Department, City Hall.
GENERAL LOCATION:
467 Hill Street
WHEREAS, said Commission as a result of its inspections, investigations, and
studies made by itself, and in behalf of testimonies offered at said hearing has
established existence of the following circumstances:
1. The proposed list of uses will not adversely affect the health, safety or welfare of
persons living or working at the site or in the vicinity, with the approval of required use
permits and conformancewith conditions and established performance standards.
2. The proposed list of uses could be appropriate at the proposed location and
compatible with surrounding land uses if kept to be small-scale with limited hours of
operation.
3. The proposed list of uses conforms with the general plan and meets zoning ordinance
requirements, with conformance to this use permit and future required use permit
conditions.
4. The proposed list of uses is exempt from environmental review. 3-18
Resolution No. 5254-99
Page 2
5. The proposed list of uses will have similar or less severe impacts on its surroundings,
in terms of noise, traffic, parking demand, hours of operation and visual
incompatibility,than the previous use of a broadcast studio (television station).
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that Use Permit Application A 32-99 be
approved, subject to the following conditions:
1. The following is the approved list of potentially allowed uses at the site with the
approval of Planning Commission use permit:
• Advertising & related services
• Convents & monasteries
• Computer services
• Credit reporting & collection
• Executive suites - several small miscellaneous businesses which share a
common reception area, conference room, etc.
• Insurance services (local)
• Offices (contractors)- all types of general and special building contractor's
offices
• Organizations
• Photographic studios
• Research & development - services, software, consumer products,
instruments, office equipment and similar items with no related chemical
processing
2. Any new uses established at the site shall have operating hours between 7:00 a.m.
and 7:00 p.m.
3. An application shall be made for architectural review of plans to make any changes
to the site and building. A site, grading and landscaping plan shall be submitted
which shows how additional parking could be provided. New lighting fixtures that
are down-type lights which do not create light trespass onto other properties shall be
installed.
4. All notices of use permit hearings for proposed uses shall be for a 1,000-foot radius
from the site.
5. With review of use permits, applicants shall submit information on total number of
employees, hours of operation, delivery needs, and anticipated customer traffic.
3-19
Resolution No. 5254-99
Page 3
6. Existing roof-mounted equipment and antennae shall be removed or screened from
views.
7. The site shall be maintained in a neat and orderly manner. All plant materials shall be
maintained and replaced as needed.
8. The approval of a use permit for the establishment of a new commercial use at the
site needs to occur within the requisite 6-month period of the site being vacated by
KSBY. With review of the use permit, specific conditions shall be established for the
timing of tenant and parking lot improvements. If a new commercial use is not
legally established within 6 months from the time that KSBY completely vacates the
site, then the site's non-conforming status is lost, and the site could only be
developed with conforming uses for the R-1 zone.
9. Any new use established at the site through an approved use permit shall be
reviewed if any reasonable written citizen or Police or Fire Department complaints
are received by the city. In review of the use permit, the Planning Commission may
add, delete or modify conditions of approval, or revoke the use permit.
10. The floor area occupied by new uses established in the building shall be limited to
the amount of available on-site parking provided, consistent with required parking
ratios provided in the current City zoning regulations.
11. There shall be no additional building floor area added on the site.
The foregoing resolution was adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of
San Luis Obispo upon the motion by Commissioner Whittlesey, seconded by
Commissioner Cooper, and on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commrs. Loh, Jeffrey, Whittlesey and Cooper
NOES: Commrs. Ready and Peterson
ABSENT: Commr. Senn
Arnold B. Jonas, Secretary
Planning Commission
Dated: May 5, 1999
3-20
Attachment 5
DRAFT
SAN LUIS OBISPO
PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING MINUTES
APRIL 28, 1999
CALL TO ORDER(PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
The San Luis Obispo Planning Commission was called to.order at 7:00 p.m. on
Wednesday, April 28, 1999, in Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis
Obispo, California.
ROLL CALL:
Present: Commissioners David Jeffrey, Allan Cooper, Alice Loh, Stephen Peterson,
Mary Whittlesey, and Chairman Paul Ready
Absent: Commissioner Charles Senn
Staff Development Review Manager Ron Whisenand, Recording
Present: Secretary Leaha Magee, Associate Planner Pam Ricci, and
Assistant City Attorney Gilbert Trujillo
ACCEPTANCE OF THE AGENDA:
The agenda was accepted as presented.
PUBLIC COMMENT ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS:
There were no comments made.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1. 467 Hill Street: A 32-99: Request to allow replacement uses for an existing non-
conforming broadcast studio; R-1 Zone; SLJ of California (d.b.a. KSBY TV),
applicant.
Pam Ricci, Associate Planner, presented the staff report and recommended approval
of the use permit, based on findings and subject to conditions.
Commissioner Cooper questioned how many more parking spaces will actually be
gained through extending the retaining wall to the property line.
Attachment 5 3-21
Draft Planning Commission ....,utes
April 28, 1999
Page 2
Planner Ricci stated that staff met with KSBY to review a preliminary site plan and a
definite number of additional spaces was not determined. She noted that each future
proposed use will be reviewed for its specific parking requirements.
Commissioner Peterson questioned whether the sidewalks and pedestrian access had
been installed in the area.
Planner Ricci stated the site plan would need to be reviewed by Public Works to
determine whether or not the use permit would require installation of sidewalks along
the frontage.
Commissioner Loh asked if the addendum use permit application is from City staff.
Mgr. Whisenand replied that the addendum is the applicant's list of proposed uses and
it includes more uses than what staff is recommending.
Commissioner Loh commented that the existing building coverage of the lot is rather
high at approximately 60%. She asked about the parking space provided in the front of
the building.
Assoc. Planner Ricci stated the site plan submitted was an ALTA survey that shows
existing improvements on the site. She mentioned that staff did not evaluate existing
on-site parking had not been evaluated for consistency with City standards.
Commissioner Jeffrey stated that typically curb-side parking is not considered when
computing required parking, and if eliminated, there are basically seven or eight spaces
remaining. He noted that most of the uses proposed, appear to require one space for
300 sq. ft; therefore, for this 9,000 sq. ft. building, 30 spaces would be required.
Mgr. Whisenand stated that both the existing building and provided parking are non-
conforming. He clamed that uses with more intensive parking requirements than a
broadcast studio would not be allowed. He mentioned that staff is looking for changes
to the site plan that will improve the parking situation.
Commissioner Jeffrey felt that two elements of the General Plan may be in conflict -
Circulation Element 6.2 says commercial development that encourages customers,
employees, deliveries to use residential collector streets should not be allowed, yet
under the Zoning Regulations it appears that non-conforming uses are allowed.
Atty. Trujillo stated the non-conforming status of the property is a distinguishing factor.
He stressed that this is not new commercial development; it is the approval of the
continuation of a pre-existing non-conforming use.
Commissioner Jeffrey asked if the Commission has the discretion to deny the non-
conforming use because it appears to have a deleterious effect on the neighborhood
and community. 3_22
Draft Planning Commission Minutes
April 28, 1999
Page 3
Atty. Trujillo cited Municipal Code 17.10.020 and stated that findings supporting denial
should be based upon substantial evidence in the record.
Mgr. Whisenand stated the Commission may replace one non-conforming use with
another non-conforming use, provided the Commission finds that other replacement
uses would be less intensive.
Commissioner Whittlesey asked if the Commission should be looking at uses limited to
ones that would not use more than the existing seven or eight spaces. She felt the site
is currently excessively under parked.
Assoc. Planner Ricci stated the use permit could be conditioned to have restrictions on
the use of the floor area.
Commissioner Jeffrey asked what the number of parking spaces required with the
original use permit was.
Mgr. Whisenand stated KSBY was located at this site prior to establishment of use
permit approval requirements.
Chairman Ready asked if the Commission does not approve the application based
upon the terms and conditions of staff, does the applicant still have the ability to
maintain the studio as it exists.
Mgr. Whisenand replied yes.
There were no further comments/questions and the public comment session was
opened.
PUBLIC COMMENT:
Richard Armfield, KSBY General Mgr., came forward to answer questions.
Mr. Armfield said he had reviewed the staff report and has no issues with the
recommendations. He thanked the Commission and staff for their hard work and the
opportunity for KSBY to be provided an orderly and timely transition from the
neighborhood in which it has been located for 46 years. He displayed an old photo of
the site and stated KSBY is not asking for any exceptions or special treatment. He felt
KSBY has been a fair neighbor for 46 years and would like to leave as good neighbors.
Commissioner Whittlesey commented that neighborhood impacts should be considered
now that residences have grown up around the KSBY facility.
Mr. Armfield stated that in leaving the site, they do not intend to violate any laws or
ordinances, and would like to leave as pleasantly as possible. He believed that agotligr
Draft Planning Commission t.....dtes
April 28, 1999
Page 4
use will have less of a neighborhood impact because the current use employs 80
people, uses rooftop satellite dishes/antennas, and operates 24-hours. He noted that
staff is recommending that a 24-hour use be disallowed at this site, and found this
agreeable.
Mgr. Whisenand explained that if another N station were to move in within six months
of KSBY moving out, that would be considered a continuation of the existing use and
not a change in non-conforming use.
Commissioner Cooper asked if some sort of de-acquisition has been started to find a
way to dispense of this property.
Mr. Armfield stated the building has been listed for sale.
Commissioner Cooper asked if selling this property as a tear down has been
considered.
Mr. Armfield stated they have spoken with developers and have determined it does not
make economic sense to tear down this 9,000 sq. ft. building.
Commissioner Cooper asked if the building has another 20 years of life.
Mr. Armfield replied yes.
Commissioner Jeffrey expressed frustration because some community issues have not
been addressed.
Wayne Pederson, 534 Hill Street, felt that the good of the residential neighborhood
should be the primary issue considered. He thought that a residential use would be
good for the site since new homes have been built next door. He mentioned that the
primary problems are the over intensity of use, limited parking, and restricted access.
Commissioner Cooper asked Mr. Pederson for comment on potential neighborhood
concerns with leaving the building unoccupied for a period of time.
Mr. Pederson stated that compared to the current intense use, vacancy would be
preferred. He felt proposed uses should be limited by the available on-site parking.
Dieter Eckhert, 474 Hill Street, submitted a'petition signed by 35 neighbors supporting a
discontinuance of this commercial use. He stated that the property next door to KSBY
is on the market for $450,000 and he finds it hard to believe that it's economically
unfeasible to demolish the building and build residential units. He felt the parking
situation which provides eight on-site spaces for eighty employees is ridiculous and a
solution should be found.
Commissioner Jeffrey asked if the neighborhood has tried to establish a parking t_14
Draft Planning Commission Minutes
April 28, 1999
Page 5
Mr. Pederson replied that he was not aware of it.
Ernest Roide, 654 Mountain View, cited Chapter 17.10 of the Zoning Regulations and
stated removal of the commercial use is an option. He noted that the written conclusion
of the staff report actually starts by saying they believe the best use of the property
would be to demolish the existing building. He felt that KSBY's submitted list of uses is
too broad and shows a callous attitude towards the neighborhood. He complained that
the intensity of the use at KSBY is obscene and should have been checked years ago.
He believed that the City and neighborhood should have the courage to pursue a use
that will conform to the number of parking spaces provided.
Commissioner Cooper asked for comment on the proposed operating hours of 7:00
a.m. to 9:00 P.M.
Mr. Roide stated that in consideration of the safety of the school children in the
neighborhood and the traffic, hours of 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. would be okay. Nine
o'clock at night is too late for a residential area.
Dale Hull, 652 Lincoln Avenue, has lived on this street for 30 years and is bothered by
the fact that this is the only R-1 area in town where a commercial building exists. He
questioned why parking relief wasn't provided in the past because the neighborhood
has been heavily impacted for years. He would like to seen this site redeveloped as
residential.
Denise Tate, 520 Hill Street, stated this has become a child-centered neighborhood and
noted a school bus stop on Lincoln/Broad. She concluded by noting that neighborhood
issues involve traffic, parking, and 24-hour operation.
Gail Waxler, 1314 Palm Street, former Hill Street resident, feels the issue of non-
conforming use can be construed to basically to allow any use at this site. She felt that
the parking, 24-hour operation, flood lighting, and deliveries have been detrimental to
the community.
Seeing no further speakers come forward, the public comment session was closed.
COMMISSION COMMENT:
Commissioner Peterson asked for clarification on findings to support denial.
Atty. Trujillo stated findings should be based upon specific substantial evidence from
the record.
Mgr. Whisenand stated if denial were supported, KSBY would legally be able to
maintain the existing facilities. If the use ceased to exist for six months or more, the
use would no longer be allowed. 3-25
Draft Planning Commission ....antes
April 28, 1999
Page 6
Commissioner Peterson asked if a sufficient finding to support denial would be that the
use is detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare of the community because of traffic
and noise concerns.
Atty. Trujillo stated from a legal prospective, he would like to see findings based on
substantial evidence.
Mgr. Whisenand asked the Commission to focus on a replacement uses rather than the
existing use.
Commissioner Cooper feels all uses listed would have negative impacts on the
neighborhood.
Mgr. Whisenand suggested that because of the sensitivity of neighborhood, all possible
uses could require Planning Commission review instead of administrative hearing
review.
Commissioner Jeffrey stated he felt the main problem is the intensity of use and
parking. He asked if there is any way to tighten parking requirements for future tenants
so that only available on-site parking can be used. He would like to see any new use
on this site provide adequate parking for the amount of square footage to be used.
Commissioner Jeffrey asked if establishment of a parking district would help this
neighborhood.
Mgr. Whisenand stated a parking district is an option that has been successfully used in
other areas of the city.
Commissioner Jeffrey asked if the hours of service can be restricted to 7:00 a.m. to
5:00 p.m.
Assoc. Planner Ricci stated realistic modified hours would be fine.
Commissioner Loh expressed concern over the number of legal on-site parking spaces.
Commissioner Cooper felt a motion for approval should include a list of permitted uses.
He does not support a broadcast studio, a contractor's office, or employment agency.
Commissioner Whittlesey would like the Commission to be more responsible and take
review out of the administrative hearing category. She shared Commissioner Cooper's
concerns over potential broadcast studio use, but understands that by its nature the use
must be allowed because of its current non-conforming use.
Commissioner Whittlesey moved to approve the use permit in modified form based on
findings and subject to conditions as presented by staff and with changes to: (1)3-26
Draft Planning Commission Minutes
April 28, 1999
Page 7
Condition 1 to move the list from Administrative Use Permit list to the Planning
Commission Use Permit list-, (2) eliminate broadcast studios, detective and security
services offices (professional), schools, ticket/travel agencies, and title companies: (3)
Condition 2 to reflect operating hour of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.; (4) Condition 3 to reflect
that an application shall be made for architectural review of plans to make any changes
to the site or use...: (5) Condition 6 be changed to reflect that exiting floor-mounted
equipment and antennae shall be removed or screened from view, (6) include a
Condition 10 to reflect that the usable floor area shall be limited to the ratio allowed for
on-site parking under current regulations: (7) include a Condition 11 to reflect there
shall be no additional floor area added to the property area beyond what currently
exists. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Cooper.
AYES: Commissioner Whittlesey, Cooper, Loh, and Jeffrey
NOES: Commissioner Peterson and Chairman Ready
ABSTAIN: None
The motion carried 4-2. Commissioner Senn was absent.
(The Commission recessed for ten minutes.)
2. 525 Cerro Romauldo Avenue: MOD 51-99. Request to modify an approved use
permit (A 96-97) to increase the maximum number of students allowed from 60 to 90
students; R-1 zone; San Luis Christian School, applicant.
Planner Ricci presented the staff report and recommended approving the modification
to the approved use permit to allow the occupancy of the school to be increased on 90
students, based on findings.
Commissioner Loh is glad to see there are no neighborhood complaints. She asked if
the increase in enrollment and teachers will affect traffic.
Assoc. Planner Ricci stated the school has voluntarily altered their hours from Teach
School and she doesn't foresee any problems.
Commissioner Loh asked if the parking and playground will be sufficient with the
increased enrollment.
Assoc. Planner Ricci stated that there is an abundance of parking available on-site
during the day and does not see increased enrollment creating a problem.
Commissioner Whittlesey asked if the permit could be amended toinclude an expiration
date because of concerns about the future users of the site.
Assoc. Planner Ricci did not recommend an expiration date because any problems or
complaints can be addressed through the review hearing process with conditions being
modified at that time, if necessary. 3_27
Attachment 6
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT rrEM a I
BY: Pam Ricci,Associate Planner F{FI, MEETING DATE: April 28,1999
FROM: Ron Whisenand, Development Review Mango
FILE NUMBER: A 32-99
PROJECT ADDRESS: 467 Hill Street
SUBJECT: A 32-99 - Administrative Use Permit to consider a list of possible replacement uses
for an existing non-conforming broadcast studio (KSBY television station) located on the west
side of Hill Street,between Lincoln and Mountain View.
RECOMMENDATION
Approve the use permit in modified form, based on findings, and with conditions.
BACKGROUND
Situation.
KSBY Television is in the process of moving its operations from 467 Hill Street to its new
headquarters at 1772 Calle Joaquin. The television station is located in a R-1 zone and is
surrounded by residential development. A television station would be categorized in Table 9 in
the zoning regulations as "broadcast studios", which are not currently listed as allowed uses in
the R-1 zone. A non-conforming use is defined as "a use which was legally established on the
effective date of applicable sections of these regulations, but which is not now an allowed or
conditionally allowed use in the zone in which it is located. " Therefore, the use is considered a
legal non-conforming use since it has been in existence at the Hill Street location since 1953.
Non-conforming uses are governed by Chapter 17.10 of the City's Zoning Regulations which has
a stated purpose to 17revent the expansion of non-conforming uses, establish the circumstances
under which they may be continued, and provide for their removal or change to a conforming
use as soon as practical". A non-conforming use that ceases for a continuous period of six
months loses its non-conforming status, and the property can then only be used by uses that
conform to the current zoning regulations. A non-conforming use may be replaced with another
non-conforming use within this six-month period provided an administrative use permit is
obtained and the findings are made that the new use pias similar or less severe impacts on its
surroundings in terms of noise, traffic, parking demand, hours of operation, and visual
incompatibility. "
The applicant has filed an application for an administrative use permit to approve a list of
possible replacement uses for the site. Given past land use compatibility issues with the
television station at the site, and the broader neighborhood implications of this non-conforming
use, the Director referred the use permit directly to the Planning Commission for its review and
consideration.
Attachment 6 3-28
A 32-99
467 Hill Street
Page 2
Data Summary
Address: 467 Hill Street
Applicant/Property owner: SJL of California, A Limited Partnership (DBA: KSBY)
Representative: Richard Armfield
Zoning: Low-Density Residential (R-1)
General Plan: Low Density Residential
Environmental status: Categorically exempt:CEQA Section 15301,Class 1 (Existing Facilities).
Project action deadline: June 12, 1999
Site Description
The generally rectangular lot contains about 15,225 square feet and is developed with the 9,000
square-foot commercial building. The building has been occupied by the television station
KSBY since 1953. There are a total of 13 parking spaces on-site. The site is surrounded by
single-family homes on all sides.
EVALUATION
Section 17.10.020 B.2.of the zoning regulations states:
"A non-conforming use may be replaced with another,provided that an administrative use
permit is approved by the Director. The Director must find that the new use has similar or
less severe impacts on its surroundings in terms of noise, traffic,parking demand, hours of
operation and visual incompatibility. The applicant shall submit evidence of the date when
the original non-conforminguse was established."
As previously mentioned, KSBY is a non-conforming use which was established at the site in
1953. The applicant is asking the Planning Commission to approve a list of potential
replacement uses. The Commission needs to consider this list and determine if the potential uses
are appropriate at the site and the required finding that the new use would result in "similar or less
severe impacts on its surroundings..." can be made. The following paragraphs evaluate the
proposed uses in light of the required findings regarding land use compatibility:
List of Proposed Uses
Attached to this report is the applicant's list of requested uses. To attempt to evaluate each and
every requested use in terms of its potential land use compatibility uses is not reasonable without
more information about individual uses and their operations. Therefore, staffs strategy in
reviewing the list was to create a new list which:
• eliminates certain uses which appeared to create too many potential issues;
3-29
A 32-99
467 Hill Street
Page 3
• allows certain uses based on the approval of administrative use permit and conformance with
certain established performance standards;and
• allows other uses only with the review and approval of a Planning Commission use permit,and
conformance with certain established performance standards.
Parking
The site only has 13 spaces on site, or one space for each 692 square feet of floor space,
according to the statement prepared by the applicant. As indicated in the applicant's submitted
materials, KSBY had over 80 employees. Obviously, this situation created a huge parking
shortfall and resulted in resentment and frustration for the neighbors with the use.
Staff believes that the only way that a replacement use can go in to the building is if additional
parking is provided on site to better comply with the parking demands that the requested uses
will generate. Staff has discussed this with the applicant and has received feedback that by
modifying the location of a wall at the back of the property, additional parking spaces could be
provided. Therefore, staff is recommending a condition that the applicant submit plans for
architectural review which show the development of additional on-site parking spaces, including
needed grading and landscaping plans.
Hours of Operation
Another major compatibility issue with KSBY was that it operated from the site 24 hours a day,
seven days a week. Staff is recommending a condition that any new uses would have operating
hours between 7:00 am. and 8:00 p.m.
Neighborhood Input
Staff has received letters from several neighbors expressing frustrations with the traffic, lack of
parking, noise, late hours and overall negative impacts of having KSBY as a neighbor over the
years. Many of these neighbors feel strongly that the site should now be converted to residential
uses and the use permit denied to allow replacement commercial uses.
Conclusion
Staff believes that the best use for the property would be to demolish the existing building and
return it to residential uses. However, staff is also aware of the economic realities for the
applicant and feels that there may be some low-key office-type uses that could operate at the site
successfully and with fewer and much less severe impacts to the neighbors.
3-30
A 32-99
467 Hill Street
Page 4
ALTERNATIVES
The Commission may approve, approve with conditions, deny, or continue action on this
application. A denial should be based on specific findings. A continuance should be accompanied
by direction to the applicant or staff.
RECOMMENDATION
Approve the use permit to allow the replacement of one non-conforming use with another non-
conforming use, based on the following findings,and subject to the following conditions and code
requirements:
Findings
1. The proposed list of uses will not adversely affect the health,safety or welfare of persons living
or working at the site or in the vicinity, with the approval of required use permits and
conformance with conditions and established performance standards.
2. The proposed list of uses could be appropriate at the proposed location and compatible with
surrounding land uses if kept to be small-scale with limited hours of operation.
3. The proposed list of uses conforms with the general plan and meets zoning ordinance
requirements,with conformance to this use permit and future required use permit conditions.
4. The proposed list of uses is exempt from environmental review.
5. The proposed list of uses will have similar or less severe impacts on its surroundings,in terms
of noise, traffic, parking demand, hours of operation and visual incompatibility, than the
previous use of a broadcast studio(television station).
Conditions
1. The following is the approved list of conditionally allowed uses at the site:
Administrative Use Permit
Broadcast studios
Convents & monasteries
Computer services
Detective & security services
Employment agencies
Insurance services(local)
Offices (contractors) -all types of general and special building contractor's offices 3-31
A 32-99
467 Hill Street
Page 5
Offices (professional) attorneys, counselors, accountants, investment brokers,realtors, appraisers
Photographic studios
Research & development - services, software, consumer products, instruments, office equipment
and similar items with no related chemical processing
Planning Commission Use Permit
Advertising&related services
Credit reporting& collection
Organizations
Schools - nursery, and business, trade, recreational and other specialized schools with limited
enrollment
Ticket/travel agencies
Title companies
Executive suites - several small miscellaneous businesses which share a common reception area,
conference room, etc.
2. Any new uses established at the site shall have operating hours between 7:00 a.m. and 8:00
p.m.
3. An application shall be made for architectural review of plans to make changes to the site and
building. A site, grading and landscaping plan shall be submitted which shows how
additional parking could be provided. New lighting fixtures that are down-type lights which
do not create light trespass onto other properties shall be installed.
4. All notices of use permit hearings for proposed uses shall be for a 1,000-foot radius from the
site.
5. With review of use permits, applicants shall submit information on total number of
employees,hours of operation, delivery needs, and anticipated customer traffic.
6. Existing roof-mounted equipment and antennae not necessary for proposed businesses shall
be removed.
7. The site shall be maintained in a neat and orderly manner. All plant materials shall be
maintained and replaced as needed.
8. The approval of a use permit for the establishment of a new commercial use at the site needs
to occur within the requisite 6-month period of the site being vacated by KSBY. With review
of the use permit, specific conditions shall be established for the timing of tenant and parking
lot improvements. If a new commercial use is not legally established within 6 months from
the time that KSBY completely vacates the site, then the site's non-conforming status is lost,
and the site could only be developed with conforming uses for the R-1 zone. 3-32
A 32-99
467 Hill Street
Page 6
9. Any new use established at the site through an approved use permit shall be reviewed if any
reasonable written citizen or Police or Fire Department complaints are received by the city.
In review of the use permit, the Planning Commission may add, delete or modify conditions
of approval,or revoke the use permit.
Attached:
Vicinity map
Applicant's statement& requested uses
Letters from neighbors
useW 32-99(KSBY on Fill SL)
3-33
\.
Rr
J R-1 j
,C/OS-5
C/OS-20
Vicinity Map 467 Hill St.
80 o 80 Fejt fir,, ,, A 32-99-34
A ®
N
ADDENDUM USE PERMIT APPLICATION
FOR SJL OF CALIFORNIA, L.P., DBA KSBY-TV
DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED USE:
Current Use:-The facility at 467 Hill St., is currently used as Television Station for
KSBY-TV. KSBY-TV began operation in 1953 at this location. There are 80 employees
that work at the station. The facility operates 24hrs per day, seven days a week.
There are 8 parking spaces currently in back of the building, 4 on the side, and 1 in
front for a total of 13 spaces.
Requested Uses:
Advertising and related services.
Antennas
Athletic and health clubs, gyms, fitness centers
Bank and Savings and Loan offices
Broadcast studios
Convents and Monasteries
Computer Services
Credit reporting and collection
Credit union and finance company offices
Detective and security services
Employment agencies
Government agency offices and meeting rooms
Insurance services - local - regional offices.
Laboratories
Manufacturing - electronic, optical, instrumentation products, jewelry, music
instruments, sporting goods, art materials.
Mortuaries
Museums
Offices (contractors) - all types of general and special building contractor's
offices
Offices (engineering) engineers, architects, and industrial design
Offices (professional) attorney's, counselors, accountants, investment brokers,
realtors, appraisers.
Organizations
Photocopy services
Photo finishing wholesale and retail
Photographic studios
Printing and publishing
Research and development - services, software, consumer products,
instruments, office equipment and similar items, and related light chemical
processing
3-35
Retail sales - appliances, furniture and furnishings, musical instruments, data
processing equipment, business, office, medical equipment stores,
catalog stores, sporting goods
Schools - nursery, elementary, junior high, etc., colleges/ universities, business
trade recreational and other specialized schools.
Secretarial and related services
Social services and charitable agencies
Theaters
Ticket/travel agencies
Title companies
Utility company engineering and administration offices
Executive suites - several small misc. businesses which share a common
reception area, conference room etc.. This was further defined in the PD
approved for the Brickyard at 3000 Broad St..
The current parking situation provides for 80 employees that work at the station.
Please see the attached photographs which represents typical weekday parking
surrounding the station. Not including company cars, there are approximately 50-70
cars parked on the adjacent streets during station operation.
STATEMENT:
We request that the existing non-conforming use be modified as requested above. We
understand that the use cannot be more intensive than the existing use of the property.
PROJECT STATISTICS:
Total Sq. Footage Interior Bldg. = Approx. 9,000 + sq. ft.
Total Sq. Footage Property = 15,000 sq. ft. +
SITE PLAN -ATTACHED
1 3-36
•RAIL
441 LL ST2EET I�
�PANNH/DLE DRO
Y sT T Nrtr✓
Rd� cr.^P INLCr IB" GUTTER .
y
iyOPapcING 1104"
��11 ''1� 17.11 PLPNfCR EPVCS 1 �
L_:'� HOPPRKI•IG SIGN GPS YPTCRM R
! � YPTCRnCTCR 0 1 11 /B4 S/6 CF \ O�y�jV OPENING
S34 47 0� E 115.00 PSR
fY�p i5y I DOOR I i BUILDING LINE-r
L ] I 1 1 CONCRETE;
= � FLAG, TRIMMED HEDGE I f I 1 APRON
rFOLE
JUNIPCR BUSH , 4 (EAVES
FIR r1I
rS1AIRS UP ) ] LPNO
_o _ I I� Rlsvia avN� cAVEg�trJ--------1
J--.I_� a---I•--"'—_--_-----�\ I CONFRETE
to — 7 \ I \I SL98J f
C-4 HANDRAIL
lB.11 I DOOR I I UTItLI TY CURBIP
i
I Oc ,
ODOR I lIDi1T
i I NOTE OECD LINE I � �
RC UNITI POOF STRUCTURES L I 1 I
OOYNSPOIi
ANTENNAS EXIST
I I ' !'' I YIRE`
II
WHICH HAVE NOT ENCLOr:
APPROX. BEEN DEMILED
ELECTRI� SETBACK UNE f
.2: 1 ENCLOS E R CN ZONE I'
{.1 .
li-
METERS
N
OI r- I fY .I AIRVE
0 I p
--
fj s TL
SUM
JL� JL I CHANGE IN
DOWNSP UT DOOR PARAPCi NtiI GHT ; DOOR `
l�—_—_ ---._-- Y MT 7.2
.
--___--___—_— V�Nf� -- I,ANDIND
LIGHT
10.6 DOWNS" I RAMP PARKING SPACE
(FOUR PARKTNG SPACES LANDING
11
m .ASPHALT PAVING TNG : i • i�
I 1:
WALL
OPENING I LOU.BLOCK WALL
ONE
\� CONCRCTE
GUTTER
CONCRET
I GRASS I I LK GRASS AREA i
•. !`. \\ 1 CONCRCTE I I ! I \)
Iv! 1 ORIVEYp7
P I 1
tom... ..: :. ; �� I K• I 1 . I S ;. �.�':
'OP GIRT 1 I \ NrC xaE I I I(
Ft 1 11 1 I I I PL �'�.
L L 1 PL NIC 47' 02' 115.00
: .. ir.
` ` �\
337
RECEIVED
John Mottmann
APR 2 Q 1999 Wendy Brown
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 511 Hi I I Street
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT San Luis Obispo 93405
4/20/99
Ms. Pam Ricci
San Luis Obispo Planning Commission
Dear Ms. Ricci,
Our house is just down the street from the KSBY TV studio. We want to
be on record that we oppose any rezoning of the KSBY property for
commercial purposes. We and our neighbors have suffered far too long
with clogged streets and limited parking due to the TV station and its
nonconforming land use.
Sincerely),
3-38
Q—LICI— yyy I W:WJJAf_I r KLA I.. A I AJI.AUtKU UJU U. U. tW!2 dots LJLL I r, i
PosWt°Fax Note 17671oax Via►
Te 1 F
CoA)W. Co.
Phone a Phan'a
Fax o a T
RECENED
April 20, 1999 AVR 2 0 1999
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Dear Ms.Ricci,
I am in receipt of the notification regarding application number A 32-99, request to allow
replacement uses for existing non-conforming broadcast studio located at 467 Hill Street,
San Luis Obispo. It is my understanding that the Planning Commission will consider
requests to maintain the property as a commercial/business location. Please accept this
correspondence as my adamant objection to place any commercial/business in my
residential neighborhood.
One need only to look to the downtown Higuera Street and to the Madonna and Laguna
shopping plazas to find vacant, suitable,and available business spaces. It is irresponsible
for the Planning Commission to consider integrating a new business into the Hill Street
family neighborhood when ample space for a myriad of businesses is available in existing
commercial areas in our City. A family neighborhood with children walking to and from
the school bus stop during regular business hours andwith children playing in their front
yards before and after school and on weekends does not lend itself to a positive and
compatible relationship with a commercial business. Children,parents,grandparents and
concerned neighbors have the right to expect that the members of the Planning
Commission will commit themselves to providing a safe neighborhood environment free
from extraneous traffic and strangers who may insinuate themselves on others.
As representatives of the people,the members of the Planning Commission have the
responsibility to respond to the direction of the residents of Hill Street. We insist upon
maintaining a quality neighborhood and expect the members of the Commission to
protect our right to do so.
Sin ly,
Denise Tate
Property Owner/Resident: 520 On Street, San Luis Obispo, CA
3-39
Dale and Ruby Hull
652 Lincoln Avenue.
San Luis Obispo, CA 93405
(805)-543-3526
Planning Commission,
City of San Luis Obispo, RECEIVED
Planning Department
Care Of Pam Ricci, Planner AVR �41999
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
April 19, 1999 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Honorable Commission:
Please consider this letter in protest of the planned changes for the old KSBY
building on Hill Street in San Luis Obispo. As a 30-year resident of the surrounding Hill
Street neighborhood, I can say that my wife and I are truly shocked at some of the uses
the City of San Luis Obispo is considering allowing upon sale of the KSBY building.
For years, residents of what is essentially a quiet, older neighborhood have had to
put up with a growing, high-traffic business in our midst. While KSBY employees have
been most pleasant, and we have enjoyed getting to know many of them, we have at the
same time suffered from streets lined with the parked cars of KSBY employees, clients,
and customers for blocks in all directions.
The Hill Street neighborhood has suffered from:
Loss of parking on our streets, due to KSBY employee parking;
• Increasingly congested daytime traffic with frequent comings and goings by
KSBY employees,clients and customers;
• Annoying night-time lighting and night employee parking and trips due to
late-night newscasts;
• Large delivery trucks, including semi-tractor/trailer rigs, during daytime
hours.
The home my wife and I have shared for the past 30 years sits at the corner of
Lincoln and Hill streets; our home sits some 30 to 40 feet away from the KSBY building.
Like many neighborhood residents, we would like to remind the City that this is an R-1
neighborhood of single family homes. The KSBY studios themselves are an oddity,
"grandfathered" in to the neighborhood during the past 30 years.
We understand KSBY's need to sell their old studio. But we would like to see the
old studio torn down, and the land used for single family homes consistent with the
current zoning and character of the surrounding Hill Street neighborhood.
We are horrified at some of the potential commercial uses the City is considering
allowing in the old studio. An athletic club? A bank? An office complex? An
employment agency? An electronics facility? Or a manufacturing operation? A
manufacturing plant in the middle of an R-I neighborhood? How can the City consider
this?
To support any of these types of businesses, we are sure the KSBY building will
require extensive remodeling, not to mention earthquake safety measures. And the
3-40
supposed number of parking spaces behind the building(13) is questionable at best. This
means with any continued or new, non-residential use of the KSBY property,
neighborhood streets will continue to be congested and parking all but impossible.
As 30-year neighborhood residents, we want our streets back. We would like to
be able to park on them ourselves, or have our friends and family find parking spaces
when they come to visit.
We understand that before it served as a TV station, the KSBY building was a
small electronics shop which sold to contractors. We understand that the KSBY building
has been the site of commercial use for at least 30 years.
But the sale of the KSBY site offers the City a chance to do something it should
have been planning to do all along: encourage a use of the property that is more
consistent with the surrounding R-I zoning. Since homes on immediately contiguous
parcels of land are selling in the $400,000 price range, there should be no debate about
KSBY's ability to make a just profit on the property by seeking residential zoning and
seeking to sell the land for single family home construction.
Please, do what is right, and help preserve one of San Luis Obispo's residential
neighborhoods. Please help the residents of Hill Street get our streets and quiet back.
Sincerel ,
C. Dale Hull
3-41
04/1-/1"J q4J741 '+-
Community Development Dept. April 19, 1999
990 Palm St.
San Luis Obispo
Dear Ms. Ricci,
This letter is in response to application A32-99 at 467 Hill St. San Luis
Obispo. For over 25 years the residents in the Bill St_ area have been dealing with
the commercial building used by KS.B.Y.television station. This residential
area has had to put up with commercial vehicles being parked on the streets and
many employee vehicles taking up residential parking spaces,often violating
parking ordinances because parking spaces are limited.
There are high intensity lights that go off and on during the night that are
mounted on the building. These lights can be blinding to traffic on Hill St.,
especially the light that shines toward Lincoln Ave. These lights are very
intrusive for a residential area. I would also like to address the many large
microwave and radio antennas that are mounted on the roof of the building.
These are very unsightly and do not conform with the neighbor houses but
stand in stark contrast.
I would ask the planning department to turn this commercial building to
a residential use only. Thereby conforming to the surrounding neighborhood. By
doing so the residents of the area would also realize an increase in their property
value which has been adversely affected over the years by an unattractive,old and
heavily used building with many employees coming and going at all hours of the
night.
Please consider the traffic,parking, lighting, and noise problems that the
use of this commercial building creates. San Luis Obispo is a beautiful city and
has strived to maintain its residential charm which this commercial building
violates.
Thank you for your consideration_
Sincerely,
Dr. and Mrs. Dieter Eckert
474 HE St.
San Luis Obispo
3-42
April 27, 1999
RECEIVED
APR 28 1999
Hear County Development Department CITY of SAN LUIS OSISPO
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
We are sorry we cannot attend the planning Cornrnission.
meeting scheduled for 2Bth April_ We would tike to be on record
against the use of 467 Full St as a business establishment-
We have been residents at 575 Hili St for the past 42 gears_
With the development of more residential homes in this area,
along with all the corning and going of the KSBY vans and
personnel, Hill street has become a busier trafficked street_
There are inadequate sidewalks_ The street,which is not of
normal width, and therefore posted `No Parking8 in many
places,usually has cars parked on both sides_ This all adds to a
safety problem for pedestrians, some of whom are children going
to or from the school bus stop on Broad Street_
With the above situation in mind we feet a business activity
would compound the already traffic congested safety problem_
We therefore suggest that 467 Hill St_ be classified as
residential_
Thank you for considering some of these factors in your
hrsal decision-
Sincerely yours,
Bran-tweli Anthony (and ffami )
Attachment 7 3-43
f�e�eiv�o�
We the residents and or owners of
properties on Hill Street and nearby streets would
like it to be known to the city of San Luis Obispo @ "T
that we would like to see the property at 467 Hill
Street be discontinued for commercial use but made
to conform with the R-1 zoning of the area.
Cop u op pe fi li on -P69 e
NAME ADDRESS 3-1 S�anatvrs
on 3
y CorBinQQ. in
�9 -A4A a�4
3 '10 t4 I LL T
VII67c W�JCCO�
U.
X13
y
OA (��
�e ��l 64
,Jun 15 99 03: 26p Controller 805-597-8506 p- 1
Attachment 8
#f iA
KSBY
IM Calle Joaquin,San Luis obism cA 9340ST1f0 (805)5414M fax:(805)swssm www.lobyWm
Sk Cm nRrdcali=
June 15, 1999
Attn: Mary Kopecky
City Clerks Office
City of San Luis Obispo
990 Palm St.
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 SENT VIA FAX: 781-7109
Dear Mary:
As per our conversation, KSBY would like to request a City Council agenda date of July
20, 1999 to the continuance of our appeal to Resolution No. 5254-99 made by the Planing
Commission on April 28, 1999 regarding 467 Hill Street.
Thank you very much for your attention to this matter.
Sincerely, gyp/
Wade O'Hagan
Controller
3-45
--� W' NG AGENDA
-� i DA..i;. ITEM #_. ;
KSBY
fM Celle Joaquin,San Luis Obispo,CA 934057210 (805)541-6666 Fax:(805)597 501 www.ksby.com SIL Communlcallons
0 ■COUNCIL 0 CDD DIR
FRE-CEIVED ■CAO ❑FIN DIR
■ACAO 0 FIRE CNIE
L 1999 ■ATTORNEY 0 PW DIR
N CLERVORIO 0 POLICE CHF
0 MT JEAhI, 0 REC DIR
SLO CITY CLERK ■ 0UTILDIR
0 PERS DIR
July 19, 1999
Attn: Mary Kopecky
City Clerks Office
City of San Luis Obispo
990 Palm St.
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 SENT VIA FAX: 781-7109
Dear Mary:
h
So that there is no misunderstanding, KSBY withdraw our entire
Administrative Use Permit Analication regarding 467 Hill St. and withdrawthe
aaaeal to Resolution No. 5254-99 made by the Planing Commission on April 28, 1999
regarding 467 Hill Street. Please remove our item from the City Council agenda for
tomorrow night July 20, 1999.
Thank you very much for your attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
VzC-t/'& ( I
Wade O'Hagan
Controller
MEETINF AGENDA
DATE so -99 ITEM # -�
• Mayor of San Luis Obispo ■COUNCIL ■CDD DIR
City Council of San Luis Obispo Julyl3, 1 /ACAO ❑FIRE CH1[r-
XATrORNEY ❑PW DIR
9 CLERKIORIG ❑POLICE CHF
❑MM MR ❑RTC DIR
��cuE3 UTIL DIR
Dear Mayqr and City Council Members. f@j,h—=iS Acrd E3 RS DIR 6 3
On April 28th, 1999 the San Luis Obispo Planning Commission
Placed restrictions on the commercial use on the building at 467 Hill St.,
formerly KSBY television station. These restrictions attempted a balance
for an intolerable situation that has existed between the residents of the area
and the commercial use of this building.
As you are aware for many years this building has not provided
enough parking spaces for its employees so they were forced to park on
the residential streets 24 hours a day 7 days a week. Along with scores of
employees were numerous service vehicles blocking the streets, creating a
lot of noise and an unsafe environment for the children and the families of
the area.
As owners and residents on Bill St. we implore you to keep the
Emits placed on this building by the City Planning Commission.
•
Sincerely,
Dr. and Mrs. Dieter Eckert
474 MU St.
San Luis Obispo
:E-CEIV]ED.1 ULG
RECEIVED
J U 1. 1 4 1999
SLO CITY COUNCIL
ME JG AGENDA
RECEIVED DATE —01D21 ITEM #=
.1111. 1 5 1999
,. Wendy Brown
SL® Ci CITY ,.,!.1_.RK John Mottmann
511 Hill Street
.San Luis Obispo
June 14, 1999
San Luis Obispo City Council �elabiun 137: 140 .
San Luis Obispo City Hall e1°D3H o
990 Palm Street U10 Md❑JR-!3 71QU❑uia end❑eia aaa�
AP
Honorable Council Members,
We write regarding the old KSBY broadcast studio which you will review on July
20, 1999. Our property is the third house on Hill Street from the KSBY studio. The
KSBY neighborhood has endured decades of traffic, illegal parking, and noise from
the activities of KSBY.
The Planning Commission's decisions regarding the KSBY property are
minimal improvements, at best, over the present situation. We strongly object to any
lessening of restrictions for the use of this building. We also strongly object to the
apparent attitudes of staff that seem to favor continued high utilization of a non-
conforming business in a residential area, even though the building has only 5 to
seven parking spaces. We ask the City Council to protect our neighborhood and
restrict the use of the KSBY building even beyond the recommendation of the
Planning Commission.
Sincerely,
Wendy Brown
John Mottmann
F
CEIVED1999ITY COUNCIL
MEbiN AGENDA
DATE=ITEM #
•
■CdU1tiCR �Or,)^IR
rcn
■Ate.. . r
SATS: :. r.. .
❑GSGNT 7EAIA ❑GLC DIR
Rico
July 15, 1999 O PERS DIR J
Mayor of San Luis Obispo
City Council of San Luis Obispo
Dear Mayor and City Council Members,
My family and I at 375 Hill Street have been residents of this area for ten years and
I know positively the attached letter is all true. Therefore, I urge the City Council to
please help the residents of the Hill Street area by keeping the limits placed on the
KSBY building by the City Planning Commission.
A concerned citizen seeking what is true and what is false,
Joseph J. Santacqua and family
375 Hill Street �✓� ;�'7 ��, ��
San Luis Obispo
RECEIVED
J U L 1 F 1999
SLO..CITY COUNCIL
Mayor of San Luis Obispo •
City Council of San Luis Obispo July 13, 1999
Dear Mayor and City Council Members.
On April 28th, 1999 the San Luis Obispo Planning Commission
placed restrictions on the commercial use on the building at 467 lfill St.,
formerly KSBY television station. These restrictions attempted a balance
for an intolerable situation that has existed between the residents of the area
and the commercial use of this building.
As you are aware for many years this building has not provided
enough parking spaces for its employees so they were forced to park on
the residential streets 24 hours a day 7 days a week. Along with scores of
employees were numerous service vehicles blocking the streets, creating a
lot of noise and an unsafe environment for the children and the families of
the area_
As owners and residents on Hill St. we implore you to keep the
limits placed on this building by the City Planning Commission.
•
Sincerely,
Dr. and Mrs. Dieter Eckert
474 Hill St.
San Luis Obispo
M. .ING AGENDA 3
DATES a�ITEM #_.
HONORABLE MAYOR
AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
• OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
JULY 151 1999
DEAR MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
MY WIFE AND I HAVE BEEN PUTTING UP WITH KSBY' S NOISE ,
TRAFFIC ( INCLUDING BIG SEMI TRUCKS ) EVERYDAY DELIVERY
TRUCKS , AND EMPLOYEE AND VISITOR PARKING THROUGHOUT THE
NEIGHBORHOOD FOR OVER 30 YEARS . THE BIGGEST PARKING
SITUATION IS CAUSED BY LACK OF ENOUGH OFF-STREET PARKING FOR
EMPLOYEES OR VISITORS . WE WERE ALWAYS LOOKING FORWARD TO THE
DAY THEY WOULD MOVE TO ANOTHER LOCATION AND GIVE US OUR
NEIGHBORHOOD .
WE ASK OF YOU TO UPHOLD THE LIMITS PUT ON FUTURE USE OF
KSBY' S BUILDING BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION . LET THE
CITIZENS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAVE THEIR STREETS AND PARKING
RETURNED TO THEM.
RECEIVED THANK YOU ,
J U L 1 6 1999 Q�4 / ikw4c&
SLO CITY 652 MR/MRS DALE HULL
652 LINCOLN AVENUE
SAN LUIS OBISPO , CA
93405-2368
VP43 - 3526
[0MIGMT-TEAM.
N�1. O FIRE CHIEF
RNEY 0 PW DUR
KIORIG 0 POLICE CHF
0 RBC DIR
0 UTA DNR 0 PERS 3
F
CEIVEDt 1 b 1999ITY COUNCIL
FROM FAX NO. Jul. 20 1999 12:13PM P1
MEETDTE IN p�AGENDA 3
RECEIVED ITEM 0
J U L [ U 1999
SLO CITY CLERK July 19, 1999
Mayor of San Luis Ob' ■COUNCIL ■coo DIR
y ISpO ■CAO 0 FIN DIR
City Council of San Luis Obispo ■ACAO 0 FIRE CHIEF
990 Palm Street 0 ATTORNEY 0 PW DIR
�CLERK10RIG 0 POLICE CHF
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 13 13 0 RECUTIL DIR
i � 0 PERS DI
Dear Mayor Settle and Members of the City Council:
The owners of KSBY ought to feel a special civic
responsibility about the uses of their old studio building on Hill Street.
For years, they have enjoyed a near-monopoly in a vibrant and
growing market, and they have enjoyed free grant of the airwaves in
implicit exchange for serving the public interest. They and their
rooftop forest of satellite dishes have been a nonconforming use in a
residential neighborhood. Now they want to pass this nonconforming
status on to someone with no public-service obligation or
accountability at all.
Broadcasting in this country has long been based on the
assumption that broadcasters enjoy special privileges along with
special accountability. It seems ironic that KSBY does not want to be
held to a standard which most real estate owners and potential
developers have to contend with. A developer who wants to build
houses or apartments, making residential use of a residential
neighborhood, is required to put in low-income housing and make
provision for various kinds of negative impacts on the surrounding
community. Here in effect we have a developer who wants to be
relieved of this requirement for no good reason.
The special obligation to serve the public interest does not
reflect something which took place once and for all 50 years ago.
Instead of allowing KSBY carte blanche to blight a very special
neighborhood, KSBY should be asked to how they plan to serve the
public with the digital rights they have recently been given gratis.
KSBY has also been uncooperative when it comes to granting waivers
to home satellite viewers under the Satellite Home Viewers Act.
FROM FAX NO. Jul. 20 1999 12:14PM P2
Even without calling it garish, one can certainly say that
KSBY's new studio does stand out. However, its potential eyesore
status can be accepted because it is serving the public and it is making
use of what has proved to be a somewhat problematic location.
However, in exchange for marring the landscape in one part of town,
the owners should feel that they need to tread softly in established
neighborhoods.
There is no need for KSBY to be given a blank check in
advance. They ought to look for possible uses and buyers which are
consistent with the neighborhood. This will prod them to exercise
their ingenuity in finding something suitable. If the only buyer needs
special approval by the City Council, that is something which can be
handled at the time when the potential use is known and assessable.
KSBY's eagerness to get blanket permission in advance suggests that
they may have a hidden agenda: for instance, a buyer they know will
otherwise be unacceptable. There is no reason to second guess the
Planning Commission. They and City staff arrived at conclusions
which a reasonable person would have no trouble accepting.
Thank you for considering these points.
Sincerely,
Margaret Hagen Charles Hagen
534 Hill Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93405